Google Analytics

Advertisements

Tip Jar

Support Blog

Tip Jar

Wired State Amazon

« The Fake Propaganda that "Banksters" Haven't Been Prosecuted: They Have | Main | The Totalitarian Future that Anonymous is Preparing for Us »

01/16/2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Hasan Diwan

"Professorial Overreach"? Is that a crime? I would think it would (even in post-911 America, where freedom-loving has become a tad, shall we be charitable and say, more selective) be classified under that first amendment which the lot of your politicians hold so dear, so long as the person exercising it is not expressing views against your status quo. So, the same freedom that enables you, Mr. Kerr, and other right-wing nutjobs to say their 2p applies to Dr. Lessig and myself. How does the shoe feel on the other foot?

Oh and, unlike you, I brazen my weblog with my name, so that morons like you may issue death threats to a real name and not a bloody alias.

Another truth

Wow pthe great prokofy neva can't handle my comment -- you attack attack attack but can't take the heat.

Put it back, coward.

Catherine Fitzpatrick

Er, put what back? I don't censor comments unless they incite damages to myself or others -- and that would have to be pretty severe to qualify -- mere hate speech is left alone.

Catherine Fitzpatrick

Professorial overreach is immoral and leads to crime, yes.

My blog has a name like a lot of blogs. If you click on "about me" or "profile" you get my real life name and biography. So you're merely being a specious asshole trying to make a completely untrue point to somehow prove yourself as superior.

I don't issue death threats to anyone, ever.

I have no idea what you're going on about, as no one has silenced your or threatened you -- and again, you're just an asshole.

Jeff Egley

As a Democratic Socialist and reviewing your article on this subject, I find your blog repulsive.

I'm also half Russian and in another article somewhere on your site, I found your comment of "stupid Russian serfs" highly offensive.

I had relatives that slaved themselves to death in the early days of the USSR and I am only a second-generation American. My last name is only Germanic because my Russian-ethnic mother married into a German family.

I found Hasan's comments very insightful, and you essentially here are the "dumb bitch", and I think the "asshole" is YOU when you think that "Anonymous" is going to start some sort of Neo-Communist revolution in the United States of America. And, hell, if there were some sort of Democratic Socialist Revolution in this nation, I'd actually welcome it.

Get a grip, woman and do us a favor and pipe down.

Jeff Egley

And through some acquaintances of mine that I have known for several years, I have learned that you irrationally and repeatedly keep attacking Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Lessig and that you repeatedly blame him for Aaron Schwartz's death.

That needs to stop and that needs to stop immediately. If any wrongdoing has taken place, let the LAW ENFORCEMENT handle it, and don't be Mr. Lessig's judge, jury, and executioner, okay?

Remember this ancient proverb-

"Judge yourself lest ye be judged."

Jeff Egley

I'd also like to add why I think I see your Blog has very few fans and almost no comments whatsoever on any subjects--

Because you just plain suck as a "journalist".

Now I'm off to go play some Resident Evil and enjoy myself.

Later. And don't expect me to come back, either, because this place sucks so much I'm not going to bother returning.

Cathiee Mcmillan

Jeff,
Why should she stop?
You don't have to read her blog do you?
You are the one who choose to come here and read and post. I laugh at people like you who have nothing better to do obviously than play video games and come onto a Blog to bash the blogger.
She is just presenting her view of things just like anyone else does.
You can accept it or not. You are the one who chose to read and post like a spoiled brat.

Hasan Diwan

I will expect the same attack when your man, Daniel Pipes, goes on about Islamists in a way that's wrong and demeaning to all. As for the bit about signing your name, "3dblogger" is not the same as " Catherine Fitzpatrick".

With regard to you're calling me an "asshole", I accept it and every other bloody label you choose to apply to me.

Catherine Fitzpatrick

Um, my name is signed at the top of my blog under "about me" AND under "profile" like many Typepad blogs. I don't chose to have a vanity site catherinefitzpatrick.com I chose to have a name on my blog. Fuck you.

I have nothing to do with Daniel Pipes and I don't obsess about Islam. I'm quite sure I won't agree with anything you write about Islam, however, such as this piece:

http://3dblogger.typepad.com/wired_state/2011/12/muslim-leaders-set-pre-conditions-for-debating-islamic-extremism.html

and my other blog is critical of Islamist terrorists that evidently you'd like to exonerate.

It seems you drive around sniping at blogs you don't like trying to agitate and stir up trouble. No comments are blocked here unless you incite damages.

Catherine Fitzpatrick

I'm increasingly finding Democratic Socialism repulsive, although 20 or 30 years ago, I used to have respect for it and even go to DSA meetings. No more. The chief reason I oppose Obama, whom I originally supported, is because of his DSA excesses.

Russian serfs *were* uneducated and stupid. Read Russian history; read Russian novels. That doesn't mean they deserved to be oppressed. But it was their liberators who massacred them in large numbers, not the tsarists, by the way.

Anonymous already started the neo-communist revolution, comrade, and your job seems to be to attempt to distract from that and minimize it. Are you one of those people with Russia in your family history that think communism was some sort of "progressive" thing because you haven't actually visited these countries or lived in them for any length of time?

I'm going to keep on attacking Lessig, who is a liar and a manipulator. Take but one chapter from one book that I explicated that is typical of his astonishing cunning:

http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/second_thoughts/2008/12/liberating-free-culture-2-tinie-causby.html

Indeed I blame him for Swartz's death -- to the extent we can blame anyone beyond Swartz himself who bears the prime responsibility for his violent act.

Good Lord, do you not see the hypocrisy in calling on me not to be "judge and jury" of Lessing, when he himself is blaming the prosecutors in this case without any evidence or due process?! He could at least wait until his self-serving fellow Creative Communist Hal from MIT is done with his investigation, which will obviously be bias but at least have the semblance of having to make some scholarly argument.

I don't care what anyone thinks of my views, my blog, my lack of comments or anything of the sort. I write as I please by the light of my conscience.

Cathiee Mcmillan

Its interesting that the Generation that watched Hackers the movie seem to have really taken to believe that Hackers are the New Key Board Cowboys.
That they need to HACK the planet.
Look I like Hackers it was a fun movie.
What they don't show you is that Yes all those Kids who Hacked would be charged with many Wrongs. It was a movie not real.
Hacking is Illegal.
This younger generation that worships Obama in that the RICH are the root of all Evil have no clue.
Communism the way it is carried out is not Good.
They think Communism has no corruption in it.
You can only have a Utopia of 1 person.
That is what these people don't get.
Swartz's death was only Swartz fault. If it is a government conspiracy then we have to accept all other forms of government Conspiracy then don't we? So then the Government caused the Dark Knight Movie massacre the Newton shootings and many more to get gun control laws. But these people don't want to accept those conspiracy theories do they?

you're ignorant

It's obvious you hate academics, but asking them where they were during Swart's court case just shows your ignorance of the legal system.

Amicus briefs are submitted during appeals. He'd have to go to trial, lose,and appeal the conviction for anyone to be able to submit an Amicus.

Catherine Fitzpatrick

Nonsense. I've taken part in amicus briefs myself. He was about to go to trial, dumbass, and might have lost and the appeal would have to be prepared. As a form of advocacy, you prepare such things in advance or even when it's pointless as a form of advocacy. You can make up a case and put it on your website -- it's done all the time, it's just EFF doesn't do it for criminal charges evidently (so I'm told, I'm not certain). EFF got their start defending hackers and that's all they're about, trying to erode the distinction between criminality and creativity. There is such a clear distinction in the law, but they always pretend that this distinction is hard to find and that everyone is always doing it wrong.

An academic doesn't file an amicus brief; a lawyer does. A nonprofit with academics in it could get a lawywer to do this, but usually the form of their defense takes place with a change.org petition or something like that.

There weren't any because even these copyleftists knew -- and said, like Lessig -- that he had crossed the line.

Andrew

I've stayed out of this for the simple reason that I have a life, sometimes, but I will step in to clarify something.

You'll probably call this tekkie literalism, but the other commenter is right -- you can't just prep a brief before you know what the issues involved in an appeal are. That's differente from simply sketching something out for a website, because to file an amicus there needs to be a case before the Appellate Court. Seeing as many of the interested "academics" (Lessig, Wu, etc) are also lawyers (Lessig has even argued a case before SCOTUS, though he lost, see Eldred v. Ashcroft) I suspect they are well versed in how and when to file such things, and that they hadn't yet isn't a sign that they know anyone is right or wrong.

As for EFF, I realize you can't stand Mitch Kapor, but you're not exactly right in your characterization of all its cases. While one of its early cases (Steve Jackson Games) found the nascent organization defending a company who had been raided by the Secret Service for employing an editor of a phreaking magazine who was prosecuted for allegedly publishing an allegedly internal BellSouth document, they weren't by any means defending hackers in the sense that you're describing it, "trying to erode the distinction between criminality and creativity."

The Steve Jackson case is seen today as a failed publicity stunt by the Service, and EFF's second major case (Bernstein v. U.S.) was a landmark case which held source code (e.g. for an encryption program) to be free speech. Neither of the cases are of the variety which you're insinuating -- you're thinking along the lines of MGM v. Grokster, or the defense of Jon Lech Johansen.

Catherine Fitzpatrick

The insinuation that people who blog "don't have lives" is rejected, Andrew. I have always had plenty of "life" and then some, and I blog, too.

See my next post on the prosecutor's statement. The tech press -- and liberal mainstream press -- coverage of this story has been DESPICABLE and FALSE -- all in service of the copyleftist cause.

Of course you can prep briefs. Your friend EFF just did that, essentially, by calling for "less draconian" criminal laws AFTER his suicide. They could have done that BEFORE. They didn't out of their coy edge-casing and dancing around the letter of the law and "lines they don't want to cross" like the line Lessig said *was* crossed. Shame on them, they're disgusting.

Of course I'm exactly right on EFF's origins and I'm very familiar with them and I've read a great deal on it. Their origins are in criminality and their actions continue in criminality which they always and everywhere are trying to bend, skirt, and prevaricate about. They have always been about trying to get off people who commit crimes by pretending either they aren't crimes or shouldn't be crimes. You're completely splitting hairs and being a total Fisker and edge-caser, Andrew, and you know it, by claiming "phreaking" "isn't" hacking. Of course it is. It's quintessential hacking. It was rightly and justly prosecuted. It's wrong. Publishing the instructions for hacking doesn't make you a journalist, anymore than publishing links to piracy sites makes you a journalist; it makes you an accomplice.

I don't care how it is "seen" in your community. That isn't how I see it. I see it as the beginning of a very long slipper slope they've been happy to slide down and I reject that.

EFF has always been about cunning nerdly little gimmicks to get around morality and the law and it continues to be exactly that. I'm totally unimpressed. If the law changes under their considerable agitation and corporate pressure, that doesn't mean that I somehow concede their cunning duplicity about morality in general or the rule of law in general. I don't.

Dan

isn't the EFF the same group that tried to argue that pornography shouldn't be copyright-able because it isn't a valid art form or whatever the nonsense was. Catherine, I was just introduced to your blog here by a good friend of mine who I have been discussing the disgraceful actions of "the internet" following Aarons suicide. I still can't understand how someone with so many "powerful friends" felt so isolated, and vulnerable that he felt he had no other choice than to off himself.

I have had first hand experience with the copyleftists and its brutal to say the least. Its drained me and my family in more ways than one.

Catherine I applaud your convictions and bravery. I'm sure as I read more I will likely disagree with you on some things....i won't think less of you for it.

I hope one day i can articulate my experiences in a meaningful way, until then, its very reassuring to read your very frank posts. thank you!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Advertisements

Follow on Twitter

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter
    Blog powered by Typepad